Imam Ali’s War with oppressively perverse people in Siffin

Imam Ali’s War with oppressively perverse people in Siffin: Upon his arrival in Kufa, Imam did not go to ruler’s palace. The palace, in many years, had been converted to an aristocratic one.

When Imam was asked to go there, he said, “I’ll never go to palace of the owls.”
He then went to altar of Kufa mosque and temporarily resided there. Afterwards, he went to Ju’da’s house, son of his sister, Umm Hani. [1243]
Kufiyans as the victorious people in Basra warmly red-carpetted Imam. [1244] At this time Damascus was the most important problem for Imam to think of.
From the years before Imam assumed caliphate, Damascus belonged to the Umayyads. Perhaps ‘Umar who had placed Damascus at the discretion of Yazid and next Mu’awiya, children of Abu Sufyan, thought that the Umayyads deserve having Damascus if not rightful of seizing caliphate but because they were leaders of Quraysh. Henceforth, as earlier said, he did not make any changes to Damascus and even never remained critical of Mu’awiya.
With the arrival of ‘Uthman, Mu’awiya was completely stabilized in situation. At this time, he regarded Damascus to be his own kinghood and mainly the imagination that he someday is deposed never occurred to him. Mu’awiya was very vigilant to have Damascus people be mentally fed by him and not by any other people. For the same reason he never let Abudhar stay there.
Subsequently, whoever came to Damascus intending to effect the minds of the people as Mu’awiya thought, he would be expelled out of there. [1245] Anti-‘Uthman rebellion on the part of the companions and other people made him treat the case cautiously.
On one hand, he never decided to stand against the companions. In this case, it was hoped that if someone came to power, he would have no pretext to demote Mu’awiya because of supporting the deviated caliph. On the other hand, with the confidence Mu’awiya took in Damascus people, he could count on this point that he would have an excuse for rebellion given the fact that he is being set aside. It happened to be so.
Having come to power, Imam (a) was up to send ‘Abd Allah Ibn ‘Abbas to rule over Damascus. He primarily wrote a letter to Mu’awiya in which he asked Mu’awiya to accompany the aristocrats of Damascus to Medina, informing him that people murdered ‘Uthman without his consultation but now they have selected him as caliph with consultation and consensus.
Mu’awiya failed to reply Imam’s letter and he only sent him a white letter writing, “From Mu’awiya to ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib.”
The person who had carried the letter to Imam (a) said, “I am coming from the people who believe that you have murdered ‘Uthman and they are pleased with nothing else but killing you.” [1246]
This story was linked to the beginning affair of Jamal rebels that engaged Imam’s mind for some time. In this time, the story of Jamal provided Mu’awiya with another propagandistic chance. By referring to turbulence of Talha, Zubayr and ‘Ayisha, as the Prophet’s wife, he could fix Imam’s having a hand in murder of ‘Uthman in the minds of Damascus people better than before.
After Jamal story came to an end, Imam (a) settled in Kufa because it was obvious that he would soon fight with Damascus troops. In this case, it was only Iraq that could do such a thing. In the very moment Imam arrived in Kufa, Shann Ibn ‘Abd Qays composed, “Now we are relieved from war with the infidels, but there is a horrendous snake in Damascus that if stinks anyone, he’ll be filled with a dead fatal venom in his body; therefore, in order to remedy, before it stinks, smash its head and throw it aside. [1247]
It is to be noted that challenge between Damascus and Iraq, in principle, predated the Sassanids period. Arabs of these two regions, each was engaged in fighting in support of one of the two great powers of that time, that is Romans and the Sassanids. Of course, presently new immigrants entered this region and had different incentives compared to the past, but the old grounds could also affect it. Damascus surrender meant that its people had yielded to Iraqis. This could be true in the other way round. Ka’b Ibn Ju’ayl composed,
أرى الشام تكره ملك العراق وأهل العراق لها كارهونا
وكل لـصاحبـه مبغـض يرى كلّ ما كان من ذاك دينا

“Damascus people dislike Iraq’s rulership and so do Iraqis, they call each other enemies and dismiss each other’s doings as bad.” [1248]
This was not an easy confrontation and it was clear from scratch that Iraqis and Damascus people will have hard days ahead.
‘Amr Ibn ‘As, some time in the midst of Siffin war, wrote to Ibn ‘Abbas, “The situation has become very critical and know that, إن الشام لا تملك الا بهلاك العراق، وأن العراق لا تملك إلا بهلاك الشام. [1249] “Damascus is only captured by destroying the Iraqis and so is Iraq by killing Damascus people.”
Shurahbil Ibn Simt objected to Imam’s envoy saying that, “You have come to annex Damascus to Iraq?” [1250]
In this time, other towns except Damascus and its suburbs swore allegiance to Imam [1251] and Imam in Kufa designated rulers for different regions of Iraq and Iran. [1252] Malik Ashatar was dispatched to Jazira (including Musil, Nasibayn, Dara, Sinjar, Amid, Hit and ‘Anat). This region was specifically a key region because it was situated near Damascus and Dhahhak Ibn Qays was in power there on behalf of Mu’awiya.
Jazira people held ‘Uthmani religion [1253] and those of “the ‘Uthmanids” having fled from Kufa and Basra, had taken shelter in some parts of Jazira cominated by Mu’awiya. [1254] Dhahhak-controled regions included cities of Raqqa, Ruha and Qirqisiya’. When Malik Ashtar went to Jazira, he prepared troops and attacked Haran. He had an intense fighting with Dhahhak troops in this invasion. He could bring this region under his control. [1255]
It goes to say that Imam (a) on his arrival in Kufa tried to brighten public minds about different matters and prepare them for supporting him in the subsequent developments. He talked to the great people and noblemen and asked their support for himself against Mu’awiya. Iraq was then dominated by the same noblemen.
Headmen of tribes were more powerful than the ruler of the city and Imam (a) could not reorganize things without attracting their attention. At the same time, Imam’s procedure was not to make progress in the affairs without consultation of people. This for people with no political perception created more desire of cooperation.
In response to Imam who said that he intended to write a letter to Mu’awiya calling to his obedience, people said, “Whatever you do, we obey you. We obey you just as we obeyed the Prophet.” [1256] Imam also decided to reveal the fact to those rulers of the cities who were appointed by ‘Uthman and had no certain problems. Included among them were Jarir Ibn ‘Abd Allah Bajali, ruler of Hamadan and Ash’ath Ibn Qays, ruler of Adharbayjan.
According to Dinwari, one of the reasons of anti-‘Uthman rebellion was to give rulership of Adharbayjan to Ash’ath. This happened after ‘Uthman married Ash’ath’s daughter to his son. [1257] Ash’ath decided to flee to Damascus and only the shame he had from the side of his friends and their opposition to this action he took caused him to stay there. [1258]
Noblemen of Kufa and other parts were given an audience by Imam and made excuses for justifying their no support of Imam in Jamal while strengthening their allegiance to him. Speaking about preparing to join Mu’awiya was something they were engaged in. for example, cooperation of Ahnaf Ibn Qays on behalf of Imam led to coming of Banu Sa’d and Banu Tamim tribes to Kufa from Basra and this largely affected consolidation of Kufa [1259].
By sending a letter to Mu’awiya from Kufa, Imam attempted to convince him to obey Imam of Muslims. Imam in a letter told him that his caliphate was based on then criteria and he had to admit it. Imam wrote: “verily the allegiance people in Medina swore to me is mandatory for you in Damascus too. The same people who had sworn allegiance to Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthman have done so to me similarly, so everybody present here has no way but to decide upon allegiance and everyone absent has no alternative except abandoning it. Shura is the right of Muhajirun and Ansar and when it is formed and the members agreed on leadership of a man called Imam, then this is the very consent of God [1260] (…)
If you are rebellious, I’ll fight you asking help of God. You’ve talked a lot about murderers of ‘Uthman. First, go on the way Muslims cover and come with them to me for trial, so I oblige you and them to follow Book of God…and know that you’re released on parole and the liberated prisoners do not deserve caliphate and participating in Shura”. [1261]
When Jarir Ibn ‘Abd Allah handed Imam’s letter to Mu’awiya in which he asked him to stop his seditious actions and join the community of Muslims, Mu’awiya asked people to assemble in the mosque.
While praising Damascus as “sacred territory”, he said, “I am your caliph on behalf of ‘Umar Ibn Khattab and ‘Uthman. I am guardian for blood of ‘Uthman who has been oppressedly killed. What do you say about blood of ‘Uthman?”
All people declared their support of his revenge for ‘Uthman. This was Mu’awiya’s response to Imam (a). What was more interesting in Mu’awiya’s speech was that he said he had been appointed to rule Damascus on behalf of ‘Umar. [1262]
‘Uthman also said, “How should I depose Mu’awiya from Damascus while ‘Umar has appointed him?”
This was while he had demoted many of ‘Umar’s agents from different cities. [1263] By deceiving Shurahbil Simt Kindi, one of Damascus noblemen and headman of Yemenis [1264], Mu’awiya could draw support of many of Damascus people. [1265] Mu’awiya regularly sent people to him to give testimony that ‘Ali has murdered ‘Uthman. Account of this deception shows stupidity of Shurahbil and those who followed him and Mu’awiya. [1266]
Mu’awiya told Jarir Ibn ‘Abd Allah, representative of Imam, “Write to ‘Ali to set Damascus and Egypt for me and when he passed away, he should not leave allegiance of anybody to me. In this case, I entrust everything to him and know him a caliph.” Jarir wrote this to Imam and Imam replied, “Mughira in Medina suggested this to me and I rejected. I do not do such a thing because,لم يكن الله ليراني أتّخذ المضلين عضداً “God never sees me in a position of taking advantage of the deviators as my arms.” [1267]
In fact, Mu’awiya tended to capture Damascus unequivocally and even if Imam ‘Ali is caliph, the region should be in his control in the form of an independent emirate. When Mu’awiya made speech in Damascus, he said, “Why is ‘Ali in caliphate superior to me. If Hijaz people have sworn allegiance to him, Damascus people have done so to me. These two regions are equal in this regard.”
He also in a letter wrote to Imam, “As long as people of Hijaz observe the truth, they were more preferred than Damascus people. But now since they have abandoned the truth, the truth belongs to the Damascus people.” [1268]
Replying him, Imam wrote, “As for what you said about “now people of Damascus are superior to people of Hijaz”, show me a man from Quraysh who can be approved in Shura or his caliphate can be legal. If you claim so, Muhajirun and Ansar deny you … allegiance to me is generally sworn and nobody can oppose it and there will be no revision.” [1269]
At this time, Mu’awiya was called emir rather than “Amir al-Mu’minin” in Damascus; nevertheless, there were people who applied this term to Mu’awiya. The first man to call Mu’awiya Amir al-Mu’minin was Hajjaj Ibn Khuzayma who in his first meeting with Mu’awiya said, “Your uncles descendants from Banu ‘Abd al-Mutallib killed your Shiykh.” [1270]
However, Jarir Ibn ‘Abd Allah Bajali returned from Damascus to Kufa after four months. [1271] Malik punished him hard and blamed him for selling his religion to Mu’awiya in Damascus. A short while later, Jarir left Kufa for Qirqisa while a large number of people from Bajala-excluding nineteen people-joined him. After Jarir along with Thuwayr Ibn ‘Amir left for the place, Imam set ablaze their houses. [1272]
This time, ‘Amr Ibn ‘As lived in Palestine. He stood aside and went to Palestine after his opposition to ‘Uthman that essentially emanated from ‘Abd Allah Ibn Sa’d Ibn Abi Sarh who was put in his place in Egypt. From there, he provoked people and even serfs against ‘Uthman. [1273] He is said after murder of ‘Uthman to have asked his children what he must do.
His son said, “Go to ‘Ali.”
‘Amr said, “If I go to ‘Ali now, he’ll say, “You are like one of the Muslims enjoying equal rights as they do”, “but Mu’awiya considers me as his partner.” [1274]
Mu’awiya felt that he could be of an important help to him. At the same time, Mu’awiya as in all cases, by touching ‘Amr’s weak point that is government of Egypt, asked his accompaniment. Mu’awiya, it is said, asked ‘Amr to rush to him after he received Imam’s letter through Jarir Ibn ‘Abd Allah. [1275]
It is also said that his son, ‘Abd Allah, bewared him of his action [1276], but Muhammad, his another son, induced him to do that. ‘Amr himself expressed his initial hesitation in a piece of poetry. [1277]
However, ‘Amr Ibn ‘As was more corrupt than to overlook government of Egypt. He was primarily one member of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar’s band. He commanded the conquests and ‘Uthman had set him aside because he used the help of his relatives in this regard. In essence, ‘Amr was one of the organs of Quraysh party who was at odds with the Hashimites.
He quickly made his decision and joined hands with Mu’awiya after being assured that he could gain the world, that according to him was government of Egypt, by selling his religion. Talking to Mu’awiya, he composed,
معاوي لا اعطيك ديني ولم أنل بذلك دنيا فانظر كيف تصنع
فإن تعطني مصراً فأربح بصفقة أخذت بها شيخاً يضرّ وينفع

“O Mu’awiya! I sell not my religion for you and I sought not a benefit from your world, now this is you and all this, so if you give rulership of Egypt to me, I am fully benefitted.” [1278]
It was a great success for Mu’awiya to see ‘Amr joining him. The first thing Mu’awiya consulted was about Roman troops. ‘Amr proposed a compromise and said that Romans would quickly accept it. [1279] Mu’awiya put this into effect and Imam (a) mentioned it in one of his speeches. [1280]
‘Ubayd Allah Ibn ‘Umar joining Mu’awiya in Damascus- that was because he feared Imam retaliating him for murder of Hurmuzan and two other people in Medina [1281]- complemented Mu’awiya’s excuse in having son of caliph II in his hands and this was publicly and highly important to Mu’awiya who counted on this. [1282]
Mu’awiya began his propaganda for betraying people of Medina and Mecca as well as the renowned authorities in different cities. He wrote to Medinans that we have risen up in revenge for ‘Uthman. If we become victorious, we will settle everything as Shura manipulated by ‘Umar and we are not after caliphate.
Medinans were irritated by what Mu’awiya and ‘Amr said about caliphate and mentioned this important principle to them that “Tulaqa” (those released on parole) have no right to speak about caliphate. [1283]
Mu’awiya made an effort to deceive people like Sa’d Ibn Abi Waqqas, ‘Abd Allah Ibn ‘Umar, Muhammad Ibn Maslama and Usama Ibn Zayd whom he heard had not sworn allegiance to Imam (a) or had been unwilling to obey him in his wars. He in these letters regularly talked about Shura. None of the people mentioned responded him favorably.
Sa’d Waqqas also wrote, ”’Umar let no body in Shura unless those who were rightful of the caliphate. Presently, there is some disagreement with ‘Ali on the fact that it would be good if Talha and Zubayr stayed home.” [1284]
We know that the bottom line of all Sa’d’s speech was that he deserved caliphate because ‘Ali (a) has a problem and others are all dead. The only person remaining is Sa’d Waqqas!
‘Ali’s idea about “Qa’idin” was that, خذلوا الحق ولم ينصروا الباطل “These people downgraded the gospel truth and assisted not the credal error.” [1285]
Mu’awiya wrote to ‘Abd Allah Ibn ‘Umar, “He does not want caliphate for himself but he wants it for you. ‘Abd Allah rejected his suggestion.” [1286]
This time, Imam (a) and Mu’awiya exchanged two detaile letters which contained important points.
Mu’awiya in his letter wrote to Imam that, “After the Prophet there were caliphs who came to power and you were envious of them and rebelled against them and we realized that rebellion in your wrathful look, your outcry, your sigh and in your delayed allegiance to caliphs, seeing that you were pulled like a male nose-ringed two-humped camel by force to reluctantly pay allegiance to them.”
Further, Mu’awiya spoke about Imam’s enmity to ‘Uthman and the fact that he was killed in his house and he remained quiet.
Mu’awiya also said that, “If ‘Ali wanted to stop ‘Uthman’s murder, he could do it, but he did not. Now if ‘Ali tells he truth, he can leave ‘Uthman’s murderers to me for allegiance.”
In his response, ‘Ali (a) by referring to the victory God bestowed on the Prophet (S) and that He suppressed his enemies, mentioned that, “The people who mostly insisted on provocation against him were his family.” Imam further said that they, Ahl al-Bayt, was the first people who believed the Prophet (S) while his tribesmen were up to kill their Prophets, wanted to uproot them and leave them in their hearts with sorrow and did the intemperate things to them.
He also added: “We were banned from having good food and drinking fresh clean water and granted us dismay. We were placed spies and guards, were forced to climb up unevenly impassable mount and were waged war. They put down a treaty not to eat, drink, marry and trade with us and never join hands with us, leaving us unsafe unless we hand them the Prophet (S) to be killed.”
By mentioning what pains he had taken in the wars in time of the Prophet (S), Imam further said: “You spoke of my envy of caliphs of my belated allegiance to them and of my rebellion against them. As for rebellion, I invoke by God if that could be true. Concerning my delayed approval of them as well as being displeased with what they did, I never apologize anybody for this.”
Imam (a) continued to say his reason for his rightfulness of caliphate. He also talked about his no implication in murdering of ‘Uthman, citing Abu Sufyan’s idea about Saqifa event and that he asked Imam not to let Abu Bakr capture caliphate but to make him pay allegiance to him. “I refused, Imam added, to do so because people were almost close to days of infidelity and I strongly feared disunity among Muslims.” [1287]
This letter is a major proof of Imam’s attitude towards caliphs and his idea about his rightful caliphate. After this, he wrote letters to Mu’awiya and ‘Amr Ibn ‘As, trying to keep them away from the wrong way they were after. [1288]
Imam (a) became determined to Jihad with Mu’awiya. He repetitively recited this to himself,امرت بقتال الناكثين والقاسطين والمارقين [1289] “Now, it is turn of the deviators, the apostates and the infidels to be launched a Jihad by Imam.”
Imam called his outstanding companions of Muhajirun and Ansar, asking them to express their idea about going to Damascus. Hashim Ibn ‘Utba, nephew of Sa’d Ibn Abi Waqqas said that those people allegedly claim about revenge for ‘Uthman. They seek after this world and they must be suppressed as soon as possible.
‘Ammar said that if they rushed one day earlier, it would be better. He composed,
سيروا إلى الأحزاب أعداء النبي سيروا فخير الناس أتباع علي

“Move towards the parties and enemies of the Prophet because the best people are ‘Ali’s followers.” [1290]
Qays Ibn Sa’d said, “Making Jihad with them is more obligatory than the one with the Turks and Romans.
Sahl Ibn Hunayf also declared Ansar’s readiness for joining and obeying Imam (a). Among the people there, one person objected and said, “You want to dispatch us to kill our Damascus brethren as you took us, yesterday, to kill our Basran brothers!” People began to crack him down. The man ran away and the people after him leading to his murder in public turbulence in Bazar. [1291]
Malik Ashtar said, “You shouldn’t be fretted with what this wretched traitor said. All people are your Shi’ite Muslims.” [1292]
Kufa environment was, at this time, so good that no one dared disagree or even express dissent. Among the people, one who raised such and idea was Hanzala Ibn Rabi’a. His tribesmen put him under so much pressure that he nightly fled and joined Mu’awiya though he seemed not to have taken part in the war. [1293]
However, even people who were fairly decent more or less remained in doubt. Abu Zubayb Ibn ‘Awf asked Imam to officially testify that the way followed to cut off Wilayat’s link to Damascus troops and replaced with enmity to them is a true one. Imam attested that. After Imam (a), ‘Ammar attested that and he became assured of his way, relying on the two testimonies. [1294]
Some people from companions of ‘Abd Allah Ibn Mas’ud – once in charge of Kufa’s Bayt al-Mal – came to Imam and said, “We come with you but our division base will be independent. This is because we want to see who is after the credal error and embarks on rebellion.”
Imam approved of their idea. One group of four hundred people led by Rabi’a Ibn Khuthaym, expressing doubt about the war, asked Imam to send them to one of the borderlines. Imam sent them to Riy borderline and Bahila people who were displeased with Imam (a) and nor was Imam pleased with them were sent to Diylam frontier after he granted them their bounties. [1295]
‘Abd Allah Ibn Badil while in his speech confirming Imam’s position said to Imam, “Their opposition to you is because of your previous strikes against them.” He then said to people, “How should Mu’awiya pay allegiance to ‘Ali while his brother, Hanzala, his uncle, Walid and his grandfather, ‘Utba are all killed in one war?” [1296]
Hujr Ibn ‘Adi and ‘Amr Ibn Hamiq marched and began to curse Damascus people. Imam summoned them and said that he did not like them to be known after curses. Instead, they could ask God to stop bloodshed and make peace.
‘Amr Ibn Hamiq stressed over hid friendship with Imam and Imam prayed for him. [1297] ‘Amr stood on his pledge until he was martyred by Ibn Umm al-Hakam, Mu’awiya’s ruler in Jazira.
Imam in a public sermon called all people to Jihad after he was assured of the fact that Mu’awiya receives nothing but force and on the other hand, lords of Kufa defend him in war with Damascus.
After him, Imam Hasan (a) began to speak, “God prepared for battling against your enemy, Mu’awiya and his troops because he is already in state of alert. Leave not your spirit of campaign that, if abandoned, casts off bonds of hearts and that careering of sword and spear assures assistance and prevention of defeat.”
After him, Imam Husayn (a) induced people, in a speech, to fight with Damascus people. [1298]
Imam wrote to Ibn ‘Abbas to ask for Basrans’ help. Many Basrans, after being called by Imam, joined Ibn ‘Abbas to Kufa. Ibn ‘Abbas put Abu l-Aswad Du’ali in his place in Basra. He wrote to Mikhnaf Ibn Salim to put somebody in his place in Isfahan and join Imam and he did so.
At this time, Muhammad Ibn Abi Bakr was ruler of Egypt on behalf of Imam. Writing a detailed letter to Mu’awiya, he blamed Mu’awiya for countering with Imam.
Muhammad wrote as to Imam ‘Ali’s background: “Now I see that you talk about being his counterpart while you’re you and he’s he who beats all with his unique record of all alms and virtues. He is from the people of the first man who has embraced Islam, more reliable in faith, more purified in family, having an honorable wife who stands higher than all people and he is of the best people to his cousin.
Whilst you are damned of the cursed son. You and your father flamed seditions against religion of God and attempted to put out glow of Islam. You organized factions and parties, collected properties and for so doing, you held familiar company with anti-Islam tribes.
Your father died after this way and you substituted him and the evidence is that the remaining groups, opposition parties, hypocrite leaders who have taken refuge in you are against the Prophet (S) and you have supported them. And the evidence for ‘Ali, in addition to his public superiority and his Islamic initiative, is his companions of Muhajirun and Ansar whose virtues are cited in Qur’an and left in memories and God praised them ….
Woe unto you! How do you parallel yourself to ‘Ali whereas he is legatee of the Prophet (S) and his descendants and is the first man who obeyed him and stood up to his promise until his last days of life. The Messenger (S) kept him his confidant and his partner.”
Replying him, Mu’awiya wrote: “To one who reproaches his father. Your letter is received … You charged your father intemperately … We and your father were together in the lifetime of the Prophet. We know that we have to respect the right of son of Abu Talib and his supremacy over us is apparent, …
After the Prophet in that time, your father and his discriminator were the first people who disentitled ‘Ali of his right and opposed him and they both unanimously allied with each other in this regard … They never let him in their works and never revealed their secrets to him as long as they passed away…
Therefore, if what we are up to is true, your father initiated it and if it is cruelty, your father again founded it. We are his partners and we followed his guidelines. In case your father had not covered this way before us, we would have never opposed son of Abu Talib and would have surrendered ourselves. But we observed what your father did and we too followed his foot-prints and modeled his manner.” [1299]
Kufa poised for battle with Damascus. Imam ordered the warriors in Nukhayla, a military camp in Kufa, to come together. Decorating pulpit of Kufa with the bloody garment of ‘Uthman, while seventy thousand Shiykhs weeping around it, Mu’awiya was made to prepare Damascus people for battling Iraqi troops. [1300]
Imam’s uprising from Nukhayla happened on 5th of Shawwal, 36 H. [1301] The first dispute raised in Imam’s troops was conflict over headmanship of Yemeni tribes. Imam (a) deposed Ash’ath and posed Hassan Ibn Makhduj. This spurred conflict between Kinda and Rabi’a.
Upon hearing about this conflict, Mu’awiya compelled one of Kinda poets to stimulate Ash’ath against Imam but he obtained no luck in that time and this was finished by placing him over the left wing of Iraqi troops. [1302]
Unfortunately, the enfeebled, spoiled and opportunist spirit of Ash’ath caused him to stand against Imam. It has been said that he had been writing letters to Mu’awiya ever since Imam called him to Adharbayjan and ordered to have his properties appraised. [1303] Ya’qubi has mentioned his relationship with Mu’awiya when Qur’ans were raised up. [1304]
Imam (a) en route arrived in Ctesiphon and asked the citizens to join his troops. Behind Imam, eight hundred people along with Qays Ibn Sa’d and a short while later about four hundred people along with his son, Yazid, joined Imam’s troops. Imam on the way turned down all gifts of Iranian headmen and bewared them of welcoming emirs in such a way. [1305]
Upon request of his companions, Imam wrote another letter to Mu’awiya and called him to Book of God, tradition of the Prophet (S) and prevention of bloodshed but Mu’awiya poetically responded him that there rules sword between them. [1306] On the way, Imam (a) demanded Raqqa ‘Uthmani – religion people [1307] who were supporters of Mu’awiya to install a bridge over the river for the troops to pass.
Citizens refused to do so and they finally did it under the threat of Malik. Imam kept three thousand people with Malik until all the forces pass through. In the end, Malik was the last one who crossed the bridge. [1308] On passing through Iraq, when Imam reached Karbala, he reported about the horrendous event that would happen to Ahl al-Bayt of the Prophet (S) in this land. [1309]
In northern Iraq and Syria, front troops at Roman border, by passing through Hit, Qirqisiya’ and Raqqa faced front forces of Damascus led by Abu l-A’war Sulami.
Imam sent Malik forward to counter with them reaffirming to him that he, at any rate, should not initiate the war. Upon his arrival, Damascus troops launched fighting and the two sides were engaged in combat for some time. Afterwards, Damascus troops pulled back.
Concerning the time of Siffin war, there appear contradictory historical reports.
It seems that there exist two quotations. Baladhuri has cited Imam’s arrival in Siffin to be on Dhi l-Hajja (36). [1310] He reports the war from Dhi l-Hajja (in the year of 36), referring to fightings in this month and after in Safar when major war took place. [1311]
Ya’qubi says water dilemma goes to Dhi l-Hajja, 36 H. and that war in the year of 37 H. lasted forty days. However, he says arbitration goes to Ramaďan, 38 H. [1312] he means that the arbitration happened in Safar, 37 H. about one and a half year after Siffin war! Based on this report, a treaty was put down in Safar and as prescribed it will be brought to an end by Ramaďan.
Ibn Athir began events of Siffin from Dhi l-Hajja, 36 H. and ended in Safar, 37 H., referring to arbitration within events of the same year. [1313]
According to Khalifa Ibn Khayyat, Siffin war intensely lasted from 7th to 10th of Safar, 37 H. [1314] It seems war exceeded those days.
According to another report by Nasr Ibn Muzahim, the first date specified is that when Imam (a) reached Siffin, he had correspondences with Damascus troops in the region of Siffin during months of Rabi’a al-Akhir to Jumadi al-Thani. [1315] Following this, Ibn Muzahim mentions events of Rajab. This condition continued up to Dhi l-Hajja during which forces from the two sides fought with each other.
After that, in Muharram, hostilities came to a cessation and the main war was waged in Safar. [1316] Naturally, months of Rabi’ al-Awwal and the two months of Jumadi can not be said to relate to the year of 36H. because Imam had arrived in Kufa in Rajab of that year.
As Nasr said, Siffin war was launched from the second month of the year 37, lasting up to Safar of next year. In this way, Ibn Muzahim’s mention of dates exceed one year beyond those of Baladhuri’s and some other historians. Dinwari’s dates are exactly what Nasr mentioned. [1317]
This is while Dinwari has set date of arbitration in Safar of the year 3786 despite his reference to Rabi’a al-Awwal and the two Jumadis and it can not be true according to his previous settings. As his book’s proofreader said, Muharram of the year 37 H. is the month when war stopped. [1318] It is to be said that Ibn A’tham regards arrival of Imam’s troops to be in Muharram of the year 38 H. [1319] That seems untrue.
If this statement that Kharijites selected ‘Abd Allah Ibn Wahb their leader in Zayd Ibn Husayn’s house in the late Shawwal, 37 H. and that Imam ‘Ali’s war with them happened in Safar of the year 38 H. is true [1320], it is inevitably to be accepted that what Nasr Ibn Muzahim said is not true. Overally, it is to be said that the majority agree on major fighting happening in Safar of the year 37 H.
The region of fighting was in Siffin after which the war was known. Siffin is a cramped village of Roman villages that stands at a rifle – shut of the Euphrates. Alongside the Euphrates, there rest trees around which water surround and in the wilderness of two Farsangs (leagues) and there was no passing way except the Euphrates that is restricted and paved. [1321]
When Iraqi troops approached Damascus troops, they noticed that they had stationed in the region having the paved route, passing through swamp, under their control. They had positioned bowmen and horsemen to prevent Iraqis from frequenting to the coast of the Euphrates.
Number of Damascus troops is said to be amounting to one hundred twenty thousand people. [1322]
Imam’s troops moving out of Kufa also numbered eighty thousand people who were added by many of Ctesiphon people on the way. [1323] Imam (a) sent Sa’sa’a to Mu’awiya to tell him that his troops launched the war whereas Imam was up to talk to him again make an ultimatum.
“Now, Sa’sa’a said, you have barred us from water and Iraqi troops can not remain silent, with all this, Imam doesn’t want to launch the war.”
Mu’awiya rejected what Sa’sa’a said. ‘Amr Ibn ‘As opposed Mu’awiya’s decision. He spoke about ‘Ali’s valor and also said that, “You – that is Mu’awiya – and I have heard ‘Ali when Fatima’s house was inspected saying if he had forty men … [1324].”
But Mu’awiya could not admit that and fighting began. The story of banning the water, on one hand linked to that of the water not reaching ‘Uthman [1325] and on the other hand it was associated with the event of Karbala.
Iraqi troops dominated the water through fighting with the courage of Malik [1326] and Imam ordered the troops not to ban Damascus forces from using water. By breaking out a news (through a spear on which there was a letter sent to Imam’s troops but the sender was anonymous, perhaps it was from a friend
that Imam controlled region will be enundated, Mu’awiya displaced Iraqi troops.
Imam who opposed the displacement of troops yielded to Iraqi’s decision and Iraqi troops could only control the water after re-fighting. What Ibn A’tham said about these events slightly differ from Nasr’s report. [1327] In all these events, Malik played a pirotal role and strongly treated the Damascus troops. [1328]
Large numbers of forces had been killed in the fighting about which Nasr has given an account in the form of boastful speeches and wars. A number of Qur’an reciters from Iraq and Damascus mediated between the two armies, trying to resolve the dispute through talks. These mediatory attempts continued for a long time.
As referred, with Dhi l-Hajja coming to an end, Muharram came and war was supposed to come to a cessation. [1329]
Negotiations of Imam’s envoys with Mu’awiya came to a deadlock. Murdering of people such as ‘Ammar, ‘Adi Ibn Hatim, Malik and those who, according to him, had a hand in murder of ‘Uthman, was set by him as his condition. This was something unacceptable both by Imam and by Iraqi tribes. Imam (a) once in front of Abu Muslim Khawlani asked murderers of ‘Uthman to be prepared. In that time, mosque became filled with crowds saying that they were the murderers of ‘Uthman. [1330]
In Siffin, the same thing happened and about twenty thousand people of Iraqi troops stood away and said that they were ‘Uthman’s killers. [1331]
Mu’awiya’s insistence on this condition was because he knew they would never accept that. He attempted to deceive those who had come as representatives and had been apt to be deceived. He said to Ziyad Ibn Hafsa, “I want you to join us with your family and I make a pledge, after victory, to dispose you with each one of the two cities you want.”
Ziyad said, “I have an axiom from my God for what He betowed me and I want not to be patron of wrongdoers.” [1332]
With the elapse of Muharram, month of illegals came to an end and Siffin war was launched between Malik and Habib Ibn Muslim in the first day of Safar, that as said, had been Wednesday! [1333] In the night of war being launched, Imam advised all his forces:
لا تقاتلوا القوم حتـى يبدءوكم

“Avoid fighting these people until they start the fighting.” [1334]
Imam (a) here intended to leave a chance for return of Damascus troops to truth. Imam advised his troops this way: “If they did not initiate war, you don’t fight them because you have full proof as to praise of God and as you leave them to launch the war, this is another proof for you and against them. If you fought and defeated the enemy, do not kill any fugitive and wounded, keep the pudenda veiled and do not mutilate any killed.
In case you rushed into enemy camp, disgrace not anybody and enter not any house unless under my order. Take not away any of their property save what exists in the division camp. No woman has to be harmed although your honor is abused and your commanders and good relatives are charged with abuse because those women are weak in respect of soul and wisdom. We had the duty (in time of the Prophet «s») not to harm them when they were pagan.” [1335]
However, war began on Safar 1st [1336] and the two sides intensely fought with each other. It seemed that each day one of Imam’s commanders led the frontline. Malik on first day, Hashim Ibn ‘Utba on second day, ‘Ammar Yasir on third day, Muhammad Hanafiyya on fourth day and ‘Abd Allah Ibn ‘Abbas on fifth day commanded the frontline. [1337]
War escalated in the next Thursday and the left wing of Iraqi army split apart but it was compensated with bravery of Imam himself. [1338] Imam himself was present among the troops and regularly called them to resistance by praying and preaching. [1339] Nasr Ibn Muzahim carefully formulated most of his invocations and speeches and portrayed two-peopled war scenes as far as possible.
Qays Ibn Sa’d, each day, spoke for Ansar and incited them against Damascus people [1340], emphasizing that companions of the Messenger (S) are with them. Seventy people, he said, of those in Badr stay with us and our commander is cousin of the Prophet (S), “a trustworthy person of Badr.” [1341]
Ya’qubi has put that seventy people of Badris, seven hundred people of Riďwan allegiance – prayers as well as four hundred people of Muhajir and Ansar stayed with Imam ‘Ali (a). From Ansar, there stayed nobody with Mu’awiya except Nu’man Ibn Bashir and Maslama Ibn Mukhallad. [1342] Just as Imam once brought Ansar together, moving towards Damascus troops, so Mu’awiya readied those two people and moved ahead. [1343]
‘Ammar Yasir was among the people who directly talked against Mu’awiya.
In response to some one who asked him how he would fight these Muslims while the Prophet (S) said, “I have a duty to fight as long as they declare monotheism, then their life and property is secure.”
‘Ammar said, “This is true, but these people have not embraced Islam. They inwardly rendered blasphemy until they found helpers today.” [1344] In another speech in Siffin, he rightly stressed over the point that these people deceitfully posed blood of ‘Uthman, yet their aim is,ليكونوا بذلك جبابرة وملوكاً [1345] “He may become a tyrant by doing this.”
In Siffin, ‘Ammar seemed to many a sign of distinguishing gospel truth from credal error. The Prophet (S) said about him, تقتلك الفئة الباغية “You will be killed by an aggressive group.” [1346]
This successive narration led some people to see in what front ‘Ammar stands and is martyred.
‘Amr Ibn ‘As himself had narrated this hadith. Mu’awiya objected why he had narrated that. ‘Amr composed a piece of poetry saying, “I didn’t know this would happen in Siffin.” [1347]
This made a problem for Damascus troops as ‘Amr was supposed to arrange a face-to-face debate with ‘Ammar at the presence of a number of people from the two sides. ‘Ammar said to ‘Amr who, in the very beginning, made a profession of faith (Tashahhud), “You had abandoned this from time of the Prophet (S) and on.”
‘Amr who in deceit was saying, “What are we fighting for?”
Was told by ‘Ammar, “You are the most obeyed among the troops. Do something to stop bloodshed.”
He said, “Now I tell why I am fighting you.The Prophet (S) ordered me to fight with the infidels as well as with the deviators who are the very you, as for the apostates “Kharijites” …. I wonder if I have to consider them or not. O You who are devoid of good qualities! Do you know not that the Messenger (S) said for ‘Ali (a), من كنت مولاه فهذا عليّ مولاه ، اللّهم وال من والاه وعاد من عاداه “I love God, his Messenger (S) and after him ‘Ali.” ‘Ammar continued to talk about ‘Uthman, “He opened to you gates of evils.”
‘Amr asked, “Did ‘Ali kill him?” ‘Ammar said, “No, but God of ‘Ali killed him.” He said, “Were you among the murderers?” ‘Ammar replied, “I helped those who killed him and this day I fight with enemy helping them.” [1348]
‘Amr Ibn ‘As said to accompanying Damascus troops, “He confesses to murder of ‘Uthman.” ‘Ammar was martyred in one of the days of intense fighting. Several people of Damascus troops claimed responsibility for his murder. [1349] It is also said that some Damascus people said prayers over his stiff ! [1350]
To Mu’awiya, murder of ‘Ammar Yasir was “conquering the conquests.” [1351]
‘Ammar composed about war with Damascus troops in a poetic line, religious justification of which is said to be interesting,
نحن ضربناكم على تنـزيله فاليوم نضربكم على تأويله

“Earlier, We beat thee for his descension and now we beat thee for his interpretation.” [1352]
It meant although Damascus people have embraced Qur’an and Islam, they really never confessed to it. Muslims also made use of sense of “rebellion”.
Mughira Ibn Harith Ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib said in a poem,
أهل الصلاة قتلناهم ببغيهم والمشركون قتلناهم بما جحدوا

“Prayer-holders are killed for their rebellion and the atheists are murdered for their denial.” [1353]
In the midst of fighting, Imam handed a Qur’an to one of his troops to go to Damascus troops and call them to Qur’anic arbitration, but they killed him. [1354]
Imam’s troops superiority was utterly apparent. Once, ‘Abd Allah Ibn Badil neared Mu’awiya’s settlement and made him retreat. Another time, ‘Utba Ibn Abi Sufyan suffered so much a defeat that he took aback as far as twenty leagues. [1355]
Of course, in some cases, left or right wing of Iraqi army temporarily disintegrated. Reports say that Imam himself fought and killed different people, one of whom was Hurayth, Mu’awiya’s Mawali and a very strong man. He himself defied Imam and in the very beginning was sworded killed by Imam. [1356]
‘Urwa Dimashqi asked Imam for a challenge and was split in halves by Imam. [1357] Another report says that Imam had trace of three strikes on his head and two on his face.
Nasr Ibn Muzahim reporting this says that Imam (a) was never wounded. [1358] Imam asked Mu’awiya for a combat. Whoever wins the battle, he shall assume power. Mu’awiya turned down his request. [1359] Imam once faced ‘Amr but he could run away the battle by unveiling his genitals because Imam was very ashamed of what he did. [1360] The same thing happened to Busr Ibn Artat. [1361]
Fighting was so intense that these days only in one battle over five hundred people (Ibn A’tham, One thousand) confronted with the same number of Damascus troops and none survived the battle! [1362]
Siffin war was tribally formed. Many tribes half of whom in Iraq and another half in Damascus stood against each other. Rabi’a [1363] and Hamdan tribes, headman of the latter of which was Sa’id Ibn Qays sacrificed in the most part in as much as Imam said in a piece of poetry:
فلوكنت بوّاباً على باب جنة لقلت لهمدان ادخلوا بسلام

“If I were gate keeper of Heaven, I would tell Banu Hamdan people to enter there in goodness.” [1364]
Imam said about Rabi’a as well, وكان علي (ع) لا يعدل بربيعة أحداً من شدة محبته لهم ”’Ali never equaled Banu Rabi’a to anyone for his love extended to them.” [1365]
Mu’awiya advised Damascus troops to aim at no people but Hamdanis since they stand as ‘Uthman’s adversary. [1366]
The truth is that Mu’awiya feared them and he was at weakening them. ‘Ubayd Allah Ibn ‘Umar, one of Damascus troops commanders, was murdered by one of Hamdanis in one of these battles. Dhi l-Kila’, one of the greatest commanders of Damascus troops, was killed in Siffin.
He is said to have heard through ‘Amr Ibn ‘As, in time of ‘Umar, (seemingly through a person named Abu Nuh who quoted this to him from ‘Amr Ibn ‘As in Siffin) [1367] the Prophet (S) saying that ‘Ammar is killed by an aggressive tribe, so he used to fight while being in doubt. Mu’awiya liked very much to kill him fearing that he might be a trouble for Damascus troops.
In contrast, a good many of marked troops of Imam (a) were also martyred. One of Siffin martyrs, Uwiys Qarani [1368], is the noted Gnostic who was and, still is, highly ranked among Muslims. Ibn A’tham while reporting his martyrdom in Siffin made an account of him. [1369]
Hashim Ibn ‘Utba, known as Hashim al-Mirqal, who had lost one eye in conquests, was the most devoted companions of Imam being martyred in Siffin. He was Sa’d Waqqas’s nephew and unlike his position of being among Qa’idin stayed with Imam with complete assurance until he was martyred. [1370]
Khuzayma, another companion of Imam, was also martyred in Siffin and Imam approved his one testimony as two, for which he was known after “Dhu ash-Shahadatayn” meaning two witnesses.
After their martyrdom, there were still seen famous people in troops, like Ashtar (who was nicknamed by Mu’awiya as lion of army) [1371], ‘Adi Ibn Hatim and Qays Ibn Sa’d.
It is to be noted that a number of Kufiyan women also attended Siffin war, exhorting Iraqi forces against those of Damascus by making poems in which Imam was praised and his virtues were retold. Among them, there were Suda, daughter of ‘Umara Hamdani, Umm Sanan [1372], Zarqa’, daughter of ‘Adi Hamdani [1373] and others whose biographies are mentioned in various sources.
Umm Sanan addressed ‘Ali in Siffin and said:
قد كنت بعد محمد خلفاً لنا أوصى اليك بنا وكنت وفيّا

“After Muhammad (S), he was his successor among us and he kept his promise well in front of us.” [1374]
One of these women named Umm al-Khayr said in Siffin:
إنها إحن بدريّة وضغائن جاهلية وأحقاد احديّة، وثب معاوية عند الغفلة ليدرك بها الفرصة من ثارات عبد شمس

“Mu’awiya’s waging war comes from his vengeance in Badr, Uhud and from his ignorant bigotry and it is because he wants to take revenge for ‘Abd-e Shams.” [1375]
Another woman was Jurwa, daughter of Murra Ibn Ghalib Tamimi who was later brought by Mu’awiya to Damascus. When she was asked by Mu’awiya about Imam ‘Ali (a), she said,حاز والله الشرف حتى لا يوصف ، وغاية حتى لا تعرف, “By God, he attained an indescribable nobility and reached a station beyond imagination.” [1376]
Mu’awiya tried to break apart Iraqi army in ways except war. Writing different letters to Abu Ayyub Ansari, ‘Abd Allah Ibn ‘Abbas and others under the pretext of stopping bloodshed and even of promising caliphate to Ibn ‘Abbas [1377], he attempted to force them to oppose Imam (a). Besides, he changed the condition by frequently granting money to his troops,لم يبق من أهل العراق أحد فى قلبه مرض إلاّ طمع فى معاوية “There remained no one but the problematic Iraqis who joined Mu’awiya in his caprice and this was such that Imam was bothered.” [1378]
Mu’awiya also wrote to Imam asking him to leave Damascus to him without wanting to obey him. This was the same thing he had demanded before and as mentioned, he intended to establish an independent emirate in Damascus. Imam turned him down. [1379]
This time, Damascus people strongly spoke about severe bloodshed and publicized their aim of ending the war. Such a measure was taken just to hinder Damascus conquest, and probably to bring about a gap and discard in Iraq’s army. This was what Mu’awiya failed to do repeatedly; yet as we shall wee later, he finally made it. In one of these days, one of the Damascus people came between the two armies and proposed that Iraq any return to Iraq and Damascus army to Damascus, so to avert a bloodshed.
Confirming his truthfulness, Imam said: “I know that you made this proposal out of benevolence and pity; however, I have considered well, contemplated carefully and assessed the dimensions of this deed haunting me, and I have found no way but submitting to was, or refuting what Allah has inspired the Prophet (S).
Indeed, Allah, the blessed and exalted, doesn’t like His friends to remain reticent and submit while tyranny and mutiny are prevailing on the earth, and not to enjoin the good and forbid from the evil. That’s why I realized that to me, the war (with all its hardship) is easier than enduring the hell with its chains.” [1380]
In one of the last war days, the battle became so intense that it started by the morning prayer and continued up to the mid-night. During all this period, Ashtar was busy provoking the army. This night was called “Layla al-Harir”, the night of clamor. Again the war started from the middle of that night and continued up to the noon of the next day.
“The enemy fought to its last grasp”, said Imam, in a sermon.
Mu’awiya and ‘Amr thinking that everything was finished and feeling that they cannot be so hopeful of Damascus army, embarked on a trick. The next day after the night of clamor, when the war lasted to the moon of that day, [1381] 500 Qur’ans were raised above the spears of the Damascus people.
There were loud voices crying, “O group of Arabs! Think of your women and girls. If you’ll be killed, who will stand up to Romans, Turks and Persians tomorrow?” [1382]
As a result of this measure, little by little, this proclamation was heard within the Iraqi army that the enemy has admitted the arbitration of Qur’an, and we don’t have the right to fight them. Imam defined this remarks strongly and announced that this deed is nothing but a trick. Sa’sa’a said that Mu’awiya took this measure after he heard Ash’ath Ibn Qays reminding of the women and girls at the night of clamor, and that Arabs are collapsing. [1383]
Besides, Ash’ath was the first person opposing Imam on the continuation of the war. We’ve previously pointed out that the account of his correspondence with Mu’awiya, since his dismissal from Adharbayjan has been mentioned in historical records. Here, Ya’qubi as well clarified that Mu’awiya conciliating Ash’ath wrote to him and invited him there. [1384] Ash’ath’s measure was supported by the Yemeni. [1385]
The minimum problem concerning Ash’ath was that he was apt to deviation from the outset, and was drawn to this path. In the thick of the clashes, we have in hand some of his remarks against Mu’awiya and with respect to instigating Iraq army. [1386] It ought to be known that tribal obstinacy played a crucial role and in all likelihood, Imam’s true heed to Malik caused Ash’ath to take umbrage.
The escalation of the discrepancy amongst the army of Imam, has induced much more hardships for him. Imam felt that he is no more the commander, and the people have tied his hands, and turned out to be his emir.
Even so, Imam stood up and said, “I deserve to admit the arbitration of Allah’s book more than the others; however, Mu’awiya and his companions are not the companions of religion and Qur’an. I know them better than you. I was with them since my childhood.”
At this moment, about 20000 of the Iraq army came to Imam, and without calling him “Amir al-Mu’minin”, asked him to accept the arbitration of Qur’an. Among these people were a group of Qur’an-reciters being contented with Qur’an recitation, and a number of whom joining the Kharijites’s range. [1387]
At this time, Ashtar at the front line approached Mu’awiya division camp while fighting. War dissenters asked Imam to order Ashtar back. Imam sent Yazid Ibn Hani for him.
Ashtar sent a message that, “Now it is not the time for a return.” “You’ve prompted him to fight, if Ashtar doesn’t return, we’ll kill you.” Said the dissenters.
As a result of this statement, Ashtar returned and he was stopped. In a letter to Mu’awiya, Imam noting that we know you’re not the follower of Qur’an, pointed out the acceptance of Qur’an arbitration. [1388]
Ash’ath went to Mu’awiya asking him regarding the way of executing Qur’an precept. He said that it’s better that one of our people and one of yours sit together and express their opinion concerning Qur’an precept in this regard. He forwarded this opinion to Imam.
Afterwards, a group of Damascus and Iraq Qur’an-reciters came between the two armies and recited Qur’an for some time and agreed to revive what the Qur’an has revived. Thereafter, Damascus people appointed ‘Amr Ibn ‘As. Ash’ath and a number of those joining the Kharijites later, proposed Abu Musa Ash’ari.
Imam refused him on account of his opposition to him in Jamal battle, but they insisted in this regard. Imam’s proposal was either Ibn ‘Abbas or Ashtar, but they said that Ashtar believes in war, Ibn ‘Abbas shouldn’t be either, for ‘Amr Ibn ‘As is from Mudhar tribe, so the other side should be Yemeni. لا والله لايحكم فيها مضريان حتى تقوم الساعة [1389] “By Allah, two persons from Muďrids won’t judge in that until the Day of Resurrection.”
Imam saw that insistence is out of place and said, “Do whatever you want.” [1390]
Later on Ibn ‘Abbas said, “Had at that time some companions been patient, the victory would have been imminent.” [1391]
So it was agreed that a convention will be written. In this convention pointing to the appointment of these two persons by Damascus and Iraq people, it was mentioned that these two persons are due to comment on the matter of their disagreement: “Provided that these two abide by the divine covenant and pledge in the firmest and greatest manner which Allah has extracted promise from each of his creatures. And that during the duty on which they were dispatched, they put Qur’an before themselves, and do not exceed, I their judgment, what has been written in the Qur’an, and if they don’t find, they will act on the basis of the comprehensive Sunna of the Prophet (S), and they should in no way, act in conformity with their desires, neither should they be entangled in suspicion.”
Besides, it was agreed that in case of the death of one of these two, before judgment, the commander of the aforesaid side would be able to appoint somebody else. During this span of time, if one of the two commanders passed away, the people of that area will appoint another just person instead of him.
Further, it was stated that: “it is compulsory for the judges to adhere to the divine treaty and pledge and not to offer an interpretative judgment of their own in opposition to the Qur’anic text, and not to oppress deliberately and not to be entangled in suspicion and not to overlook the order of Qur’an and Sunna of the Prophet (S) in their judgment. And if they don’t do so, the people won’t submit to their judgment, neither will they admit the treaty and the liability approved by those two.”
In the convention, the date of the arbitration was sset on the end of the next Ramaďan (to wit eight months from Safar to Ramaďan) and it was agreed that the issue will be resolves anyhow up to the pilgrimage season. “If they don’t judge on the basis of the Qur’an and Prophet’s (S) Sunna till the end of the season, the Muslims will remain at war as they were from the onset, and there is no condition between the two groups in this regard.” The aforesaid treaty was concluded on Wednesday (according th Abu Mikhnaf, on Friday) [1392], on Safar 17, 37 A.H. [1393]
In this convention, equal rights were been determined for Imam and Mu’awiya. In the first stage, Imam’s name was accompanied by the title “Amir al-Mu’minin”, the Commander of the Faithful, but it was not acceptable for Mu’awiya.
Ash’ath insisted on the elimination of this title, Imam said, “Glory be to Allah, A Sunna like The Prophet’s (S) one, where Suhayl Ibn ‘Amr, the representative of polytheists, insisted on the ommition of “Rasul Allah”, the Messenger of Allah, in Hudaybiyyah peace pact.” [1394]
Anyhow, the convention was written, but among a group of Imam’s companion, a riot broke out which paved the way for Kharijites incidents later. Some disagreed with the convention there except for those being truly among the Shi’ite Muslims of Imam, and bearing the arbitration course for Imam’s sake.
Malik was among them, when Imam (a) was told that Malik is not satisfied with this convention, Imam (a) said, “When I will be satisfied, Malik will be so as well, and I’m satisfied. You said he has kept himself aloof from me, but I don’t reckon that he’ll do so. There are not two persons or even one person amongst you like him, who think so about their foe.” [1395]
Imam returned to Kufa along with the army on Rabi’ al-Awwal 37 A.H. [1396] In Kufa, loud voices of cries and weeps were heard from each house, and Imam confirming the martyrdom of their martyrs, offered his condolence to them. Finally, Imam sent Abu Musa to the arbitration site.
Imam dispatched 400 persons along with Abu Musa Ash’ari, accompanied by Shurayh Ibn Hani as their commander, and ‘Abd Allah Ibn ‘Abbas as their congregational prayer leader. Additionally, Imam notified Abu Musa of the defiled nature of Mu’awiya and advised him tremendously. [1397]
At this time, ‘Abd Allah Ibn ‘Umar, Mughira Ibn Shu’ba, ‘Abd Allah Ibn Zubayr had to come to Mu’awiya and were present at the meeting incident of ‘Amr Ibn ‘As and Abu Musa. [1398] ‘Amr Ibn ‘As, when meeting Abu Musa, spoke of the virtues! of Mu’awiya and noted that Mu’awiya is the blood-wit of ‘Uthman, and Allah has put a “Sultan” for blood-wit.
Abu Musa relied on the revival of ‘Umar tradition concerning the issue of council. Once he spoke of ‘Abd Allah Ibn ‘Umar, but ‘Amr said that a weak person like him could not take the responsibility of such a deed. It was not only unclear under which principles this council being regarded as a pretext by the dissenters, ought to be shaped, but not obvious who should be the member of such a council. Once ‘Umar relying on his own power has placed caliphate among six persons so that they will choose one out of them. What was the connection of this matter to leaving the work to the “Council among Muslims”, so to select one for themselves?
Abu Musa insisted on this matter and an account of that he was of the belief that firstly we ought to leave this belief aside that one of the two persons either Imam or Mu’awiya should be the caliph, so that thereupon we shall select some one. Hence, for Abu Musa’s part, the declaration of these two commands’ deposition of Imam’s commentary on the pulpit, ‘Amr Ibn ‘As announced that he has just the right to depose ‘Ali (a); however, I have the caliphate to Mu’awiya!
Abu Musa cried out in protest and insulted ‘Amr Ibn ‘As. Abu Musa called ‘Amr a dog, and ‘Amr called Abu Musa a donkey and the session turned out in chaos. So hereby, without speaking of the Qur’an and the Sunna of the Prophet (S), and merely under the pretext of ‘Umar tradition, the arbitration course itself gave rise to another disagreement between Damascus and Iraq. [1399]
From that time on, the people of Damascus called Mu’awiya “Amir al-Mu’minin”, and this was the most significant outcome of the arbitration for the Damascus people. Abu Mikhnaf stated that when Iraqi people were going to Siffin, they were all amiable and kind towards each other. When they returned, however, they all had hostility and hatred towards each other.
The Kharijites said, “You were flaccid in implementing Allah’s order”, and another group told them, “You disobeyed Imam and our group.” Imam became sorrowful on account of their remarks. [1400]
Notes:
[1243] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 3,5; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 349 It is to be said that the most comprehensive work on the event of Siffin is the valuable book “Waq‘at Siffin”, written by Nasr Ibn Muzahim, dead in 212 Ibn A‘tham has mainly used this book in reporting about Siffin and he has condensed the book Sources such as Tarikh at-Tabari and Baladhuri have quoted mainly from Abu Mikhnaf except a few sporadic reports
[1244] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 347
[1245] Ibid vol. II, pp 360-361
[1246] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, pp 211-212
[1247] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 8
[1248] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 56; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 432; Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 160
[1249] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 411
[1250] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 403
[1251] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 212
[1252] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 12-13
[1253] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 350
[1254] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 297
[1255] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 350; Waq‘at Siffin, p. 113; Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 167
[1256] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 352
[1257] Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 156
[1258] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 21; al-Futuh, vol. II, pp 370-371
[1259] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 27
[1260] ‘Abd al-Rahman Ibn Ghanm Azdi who was known as “Afqah ahl Sham”(Horizon of Damascus people) said to Shurahbil in Damascus, “Even if ‘Ali has murdered ‘Uthman, he would be caliph of Muslims since Muhajirun and Ansar have sworn allegiance to him and they are “superior to people” Waq‘at Siffin, p. 45
[1261] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 29; al-Futuh, vol. II, pp 374-375; Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 157
[1262] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 380
[1263] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 32
[1264] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 411, he was proud not because of being from Damascus but because he was a Yemeni
[1265] al-Futuh, vol. II, pp 406-407; Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 160
[1266] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 44-52; al-Futuh, vol. II, pp 397-401; Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 275-276 (footnote); Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 159
[1267] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 52; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 392
[1268] al-Futuh, vol. II, pp 429-430
[1269] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 58; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 432
[1270] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 77
[1271] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 404
[1272] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 61
[1273] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 283
[1274] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 284; Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 157
[1275] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 382
[1276] In Sunnites sources ‘Abd Allah Ibn ‘Amr Ibn ‘As, one of Sahaba hadith-writers, is defended while ‘Abd Allah was present in Siffin arm in arm with his father ‘Abd Allah commanded the left wing of Damascus troops Waq‘at Siffin, p. 206 It goes to say that when his father asked him to hold the banner, he first rejected and said, “I’ll never fight anyone who has not been even one moment an atheist ” His father obligated him to hold the banner, he took it and said, “If the Prophet had not said, “Obey your father”, “I would have never done this!!” al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 35
[1277] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 35; Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 285; Tarikh al-Ya’qubi, vol. II, p. 185
[1278] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 39; Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 288; Tarikh al-Ya’qubi, vol. II, p. 186 ‘Amr lived only until 43 H and was ruler of Egypt
[1279] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 37,44; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 386
[1280] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 441
[1281] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 294; Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 161
[1282] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 82-83; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 413
[1283] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 63; al-Futuh, vol. II, pp 416-417
[1284] Waq‘at Siffin, vol. 75; Tarikh al-Ya’qubi, vol. II, p. 187; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 421
[1285] Nahj al-Balaghah, catchwords, No 18
[1286] al-Futuh, vol. II, pp 418-419
[1287] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 86-91; Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, pp 277-282; Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah, Ibn Abi l-Hadid, vol. 15, p. 73; al-Futuh, vol. II, pp 474-475; Nahj As-Sa‘ada, vol. 4, p. 185
[1288] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 110-111; al-Futuh, vol. II, pp 477-480
[1289] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 460
[1290] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 101; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 460
[1291] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 293; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 362; Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 164 Imam paid his blood money out of public property
[1292] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 92-96
[1293] Ibid pp 98-99; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 444
[1294] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 101
[1295] Ibid p. 115; Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 165, he seems to be the same Khajih Rabi‘ whose tombstone, in Mashhad is visited very much
[1296] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 102; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 447
[1297] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 103; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 448, Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 165
[1298] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 114-115
[1299] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 118-121; Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, pp 393-397 and in the footnote of Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah, Ibn Abi l-Hadid, vol. III, p. 188; Muruj al-dhahab, vol. III, p. 10; SamT al-Nujum al-’Awali, vol. II, p. 465
[1300] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 127
[1301] Ibid p. 131
[1302] al-Futuh, vol. III, pp 105-107
[1303] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, pp 296-297
[1304] Tarikh al-Ya’qubi, vol. II, pp 188-189
[1305] Waq‘at Siffin, vol. II, p. 144; al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 468
[1306] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 150-151; Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 297
[1307] Tarikh al-Ya’qubi, vol. II, p. 187
[1308] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 298; al-Futuh, vol. II, pp 487-488
[1309] al-Futuh, vol. II, pp 462-466; Waq‘at Siffin, pp 140-142
[1310] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 299
[1311] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 303
[1312] Tarikh al-Ya’qubi, vol. II, pp 188,190
[1313] al-Kamil fi l-Tarikh, vol. III, pp 293,321
[1314] Tarikh Khalifat Ibn Khayyat, p. 191
[1315] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 190
[1316] Ibid p. 196
[1317] Akhbar al-Tiwal, pp 169-172
[1318] Ibid p. 171
[1319] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 495
[1320] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 362
[1321] Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 168
[1322] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 439
[1323] Akhbar al-Tiwal, pp 166-167
[1324] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 163
[1325] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 298; al-Futuh, vol. III, p. 2
[1326] al-Futuh, vol. III, p. 13
[1327] Ibid vol. III, p. 15
[1328] Nasr Ibn Muzahim says, وكان اكثر القوم حروباً الاشتر Waq‘at Siffin, p. 195
[1329] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 196
[1330] Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 163
[1331] Ibid p. 170
[1332] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 199
[1333] Ibid p. 214; Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 303
[1334] al-Futuh, vol. III, pp 44-45
[1335] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 203-204
[1336] Despite mention of the date in several sources, 12th of Safar is regarded by Baladhuri (Ansab, vol. II, p. 323) to be on Friday that is inconsistent with this date But regarding the report by Nasr about the citation of arbitration agreement of Wednesday 17th of Safar, Baladhuri’s reference to Friday 12th of Safar is approved
[1337] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, pp 303-305
[1338] Ibid vol. II, pp 305-306
[1339] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 230-232
[1340] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 447
[1341] Ibid p. 236; Ashtar in his speech said that roughly one hundred people from Badr stay with us Waq‘at Siffin, p. 238
[1342] Tarikh al-Ya’qubi, vol. II, p. 188
[1343] al-Futuh, vol. III, pp 180-181
[1344] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 215
[1345] Ibid p. 319
[1346] Concerning the sources, Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, pp 312-313 (footnote) in the following pages ‘Amr Ibn ‘As is quoted to have said the afore-mentioned hadith
[1347] al-Futuh, vol. III, p. 131
[1348] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 239; al-Futuh, vol. III, pp 124-125
[1349] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 311-313
[1350] Mukhtasar Tarikh Dimashq, vol. 5, p. 236
[1351] al-Muhabbar, p. 296
[1352] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 340; Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 310
[1353] al-Futuh, vol. III, p. 271
[1354] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 244
[1355] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 360
[1356] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 41; Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 176
[1357] al-Futuh, vol. III, p. 187
[1358] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 363
[1359] Ibid p. 274; Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 176
[1360] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 407; Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 330; Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 177
[1361] al-Futuh, vol. III, pp 173-174
[1362] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 293; al-Futuh, vol. III, p. 55
[1363] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 325; Akhbar al-Tiwal, p. 186
[1364] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 437; Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 322; al-Futuh, vol. III, pp 43 – 44
[1365] al-Futuh, vol. III, p. 163
[1366] al-Futuh, vol. III, p. 163
[1367] al-Futuh, vol. III, pp 119-120
[1368] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 324; Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 320 Baladhuri hesitates to report about martyrdom of Uwiys The proof reader mentions on pages 320-322 various sources in which this undeniable report is referred
[1369] al-Futuh, vol. II, pp 451-460
[1370] He is reported in detail in Waq‘at Siffin including, pp 346-356
[1371] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 67
[1372] Ibid vol. II, p. 101
[1373] Ibid vol. III, p. 142
[1374] al-Futuh, vol. III, p. 103
[1375] al-Wafidat min l-Nisa’ ‘ala Mu‘awiya, p. 29
[1376] Ibid p. 36
[1377] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 307
[1378] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 435; al-Futuh, vol. III, pp 221-222
[1379] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 470-471
[1380] Ibid, p. 474; al-Futuh, vol. III, pp 264-65
[1381] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 323
[1382] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 478
[1383] Ibid, p. 481
[1384] Tarikh al-Ya’qubi, vol. II, pp 188-89
[1385] Ibid, vol. II, p. 189
[1386] al-Futuh, vol. II, p. 74
[1387] Waq‘at Siffin
[1388] Ibid, pp 490-494
[1389] Regrettably Muďri and Yemeni competition induced problem at Siffin battle
[1390] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 499-500
[1391] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 331
[1392] Ibid, vol. II, p. 337; see, p. 338
[1393] Akhbar al-Tiwal, pp 194-196, Waq‘at Siffin, pp 504-570, see, Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, pp 334-335
[1394] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 508; Tarikh al-Ya’qubi, vol. II, p. 189
[1395] Waq‘at Siffin, p. 521; see, Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 236
[1396] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 237
[1397] Nathr ad-Durr, vol. I, p. 421
[1398] Waq‘at Siffin, pp 540-541
[1399] Waq‘at Siffin pp 545-546; Akhbar al-Tiwal, pp 199-201; Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, pp 350-51
[1400] Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. II, p. 342

The Caliphate of Imam Hasan (A.S.)